minutes of fairfax county planning commission … · fairfax county planning commission wednesday,...

MINUTES OF

FAIRFAX COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2019

PRESENT: Peter F. Murphy, Chairman, Springfield District

John A. Carter, Hunter Mill District

James R. Hart, Commissioner At-Large

Timothy J. Sargeant, Commission At-Large

Ellen J. Hurley, Braddock District

John C. Ulfelder, Dranesville District

James T. Migliaccio, Lee District

Julie M. Strandlie, Mason District

Walter C. Clarke, Mount Vernon District

Phillip A. Niedzielski-Eichner, Providence District

Donte Tanner, Sully District

Mary D. Cortina, Commissioner At-Large

ABSENT: None

//

The meeting was called to order at 7:33 p.m., by Chairman Peter F. Murphy, in the Board Auditorium of the Fairfax County Government Center, 12000 Government Center Parkway,

Fairfax, Virginia 22035.

//

COMMISSION MATTERS

Commissioner Hart announced that the Planning Commission's Environment Committee would meet on September 26, 2019, at 7:30 p.m., in the Board conference room to receive an update from the Fairfax County Planning Division staff on the proposed Natural Landscaping Zoning

Ordinance amendment.

//

CODE AMENDMENT — CHAPTER 118 (CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION

ORDINANCE AND CHAPTER 124 (STORM WATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE) OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA (COUNTY CODE) RE: LONG-

TERM MAINTENANCE OF STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES, ILLICIT DISCHARGES, AND ENFORCEMENT (Decision Only) (The public hearing for these applications was held on July 24, 2019.) (Decision only on July 31, 2019 and September 12, 2019)

(Start Verbatim Transcript)

Commissioner Hart: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On July 24, the Commission held a public

hearing on a series of proposed amendments to Chapter 118, the Chesapeake Bay Ordinance and Chapter 124, the Stormwater Management Ordinance. We've deferred the decision twice since

1

COMMISSION MATTERS September 18, 2019

then to review the testimony and comments received. I want to thank, very much, our staff team

including Jan Leavitt, Ellie Codding, Brian Keightley, Karlee Copeland, Annita McCormick,

Hugh Whitehead, Marc Gori in the Office of County Attorney, and particularly Jon Friedman for

their fine work on this difficult topic. Stormwater is among the most frequent topics for citizen

testimony at public hearings. It's a big issue of expense for developers and the impacts from

stormwater affect our quality of life, not just the immediate neighbors directly, but in a larger

sense, our global community. We want to make sure that our Ordinance is up-to-date and

satisfactorily addresses these impacts. I also want to thank the citizens who testified or submitted

written comments to staff and the Commission. Based on the testimony received and the

comments from the Commission, in consultation with staff, I'm going to recommend that the

Chapter 118 amendments be withdrawn at this time and that they be recoupled with upcoming

PFM revisions and re-advertised to accommodate a simultaneous consideration of both

documents. This will allow for further reflection and input by interested stakeholders. I believe

there is merit in amending the Ordinance to refer to or to direct people to the Public Facilities

Manual. But I also agree that it would make more sense to do that when we have the specific

changes to the PFM in front of us, so we'd know specifically what we're changing. We want to

get the package right. Taking out Chapter 118 from the package, that leaves the amendments to

Chapter 124. We have two principle issues to resolve following the public hearing and, although

I think I wasn't quite there at the time of the public hearing, my recommendation ultimately is

going to coincide with the staff recommendation on both of those points. I still have concerns

about the first issue, deleting the requirement for an annual report by a homeowners association

charged with maintaining an underground stormwater facility. But ultimately, I'm persuaded that

the report itself has little or no effect on either the maintenance of the component or the County's

oversight and enforcement. As to the second issue, providing and option to the current practice of

a written maintenance agreement, the amendment brings the Ordinance more in line with the

wording of state regulation and only creates an option for flexibility. Fairfax County, in the

meantime, will still continue to require the written agreements and any other option would have

to be acceptable to the Director after vetting with the Board. I'm comfortable that these limited

changes recommended by staff are appropriate at this time and will not compromise water

quality or enforcement efforts. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I will have two motions. First, this is

for action on amendments to Chapter 118, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT THE BOARD NOT APPROVE

THE AMENDMENTS TO THE CHESAPEAKE BAY PRESERVATION — PRESERVATION

ORDINANCE AT THIS TIME AND THAT THE AMENDMENTS BE RE-ADVERTISED

WITH RELATED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 12 OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES

MANUAL AT A LATER DATE.

Commissioner Sargeant: Second.

Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Sargeant. Is there a discussion of the motion? All those in

favor of the motion as articulated by Commissioner — Commissioner Hart this evening, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Murphy: Opposed? Motion carries.

2

COMMISSION MATTERS September 18, 2019

Commissioner Hart: Thank you. Secondly, Mr. Chairman, this is for action on amendments to Chapter 124,1 MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS THAT THE BOARD ADOPT THE REVISED AMENDMENTS

TO THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE DATED SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2019.

Commissioner Sargeant: Second.

Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Sargeant. Is there a discussion of that motion? All those in favor of the motion, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


Each motion carried by a vote of 12-0.

(End Verbatim Transcript)

//

Secretary Migliaccio established the following order of the agenda:

1. RZ 2018-HM-020 - APA PROPERTIES NO. 6, L.P.

2. SEA 2010-LE-025 — COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

3. SE 2019-SU-002/ 2232-Y18-35 — FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY

4. SE 2018-PR-023/2232-P18-26 — FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY

5. PCA-C-597-05/SEA 2007-PR-014 — PS BUSINESS PARKS, L.P.

6. SE 2018-BR-028 — CLASSIC COTTAGES, LLC

This order was accepted without objection.

//

RZ 2018-HM-020 - APA PROPERTIES NO. 6, L.P. — Appl. to

rezone from 1-5 to PRM to permit mixed use development with a

total intensity of 2.0 Floor Area Ratio (FAR) inclusive of bonus

density. Located on the N. of Sunset Hills Rd., W. side of Wiehle

Ave. and N. side of Washington and Old Dominion Railroad Trail

(Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority) on approx. 32.41 ac.

of land. Comp. Plan Rec: Mixed Use. Hunter Mill District. Tax

Map 17-4 ((5)) 3C1, 3E1, 3N1, 3W2, 6S2, 6S4, 7E2 and 7N2.

(HUNTER MILL DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

Andrew Painter, Applicant's Agent, Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, P.C., reaffirmed the

affidavit dated September 3, 2019.

3

RZ 2018-HM-020 - APA PROPERTIES NO. 6, L.P. September 18, 2019

Commissioner Hart disclosed that his law firm, Hart and Horan, P.C., has two cases where there

were attorneys in Mr. Painter's firm representing adverse parties. He noted that matter and those

parties were unrelated to the subject application and there was no business or financial

relationship. Secondly, subsequent to the publication of the staff report, his law firm has one case

in which a client subsequently hired one of the engineers with Urban Engineering, Associates, as

an expert witness. While he nor his law firm has no direct financial or business relationship with

the engineer but because the case is ongoing, he recused himself from the public hearing.

William Mayland, Zoning Evaluation Division, Department of Planning and Development

presented the staff report, a copy of which is in the date file. He noted that staff recommended

approval of application RZ 2018-HM-020.

Mr. Painter gave a presentation on the subject application.

There was a discussion between Mr. Painter; Andrea Dorlester, Fairfax County Park Authority;

Peter Crawford, Applicant's Engineer, Urban Engineering, Associates; and multiple

Commissioners on the following issues:

• The location of the dog park;

• The density proposed for this application compared to the density allowed for the entire

property;

• A summary of applicant's improvements based on the Virginia Department of

Transportation's comments;

• Parking accommodations for the athletic field;

• The applicant's proposed Transportation Demand Management Plan;

• The addition of two access points to signalized intersections in response to the anticipated

increase of pedestrian and bicycle traffic on the property;

• The separation of bicycle and pedestrian traffic to mitigate conflict areas;

• The type of synthetic turf proposed for the athletic field;

• The language in the proffers that determined the timing of the athletic field installation

and its location;

The applicant's proposed plan of phasing the buildings to be built over a twenty-year

period and the proposed stormwater management during that time frame; and

The proffer language that addressed stormwater management during the twenty-year

buildout phase.

The discussion resulted in no changes to the subject application.

Chairman Murphy called for speakers from the audience but received no response.

There was a final discussion between Mr. Painter and Commissioners Carter and Cortina on the

following issues:

• The types of synthetic turf used for athletic fields;

• The proposed phasing of the buildings; and

• The language in Proffer 28 that addressed stormwater management provisions during the

buildout phase.

4



There were no further comments or questions from the Commission and staff had no closing remarks; therefore, Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing and recognized Commissioner Carter for action on this case.


Commissioner Carter: Okay. Revitalizing and finding new uses for these aging office parks before they become a significant problem is an issue in this area and throughout the United States. The Planning Commission has reviewed several attempts at solving this problem in Fairfax County. This project, so far in Reston, demonstrates in a limited way that Fairfax County is on the cutting edge of solving this Urban Planning problem. Key features of the Isaac Newton Square project — and by the way, it is called Isaac Newton Square — I know it's called APA Properties, but Isaac Newton is a little better term — at least some of us know where that is — infill with new uses, that's number one. Staff is adding new uses, as you heard, to an aging office park. Today, several of the offices remain empty. Even the Reston Association left the central building, which was designed for them at the time. The — the substantial parking lot remains mostly empty during all hours and could cause a significant problem. The remaining uses will include at least two office buildings, the One Life Fitness Center and some daycare facilities. Most of the remaining office buildings will be removed, 2100 residences will be added, and a limited amount of retail will also be added. The impact on the road system will be somewhat reduced because the residential development will be offset — at least some of the impact of the former office development. This is a substantial improvement. In addition, the project will be in walking distance of the existing Wiehle Avenue Reston East Metro Station. This emphasis on walking will help reduce the impact on the roads in the area. Staff is also examined the impact on the schools, which was an issue with the PNZ committee. And the required payment to support future construction has been proffered. Although the payment, we know, does not support the construction of a school by itself, Fairfax County Schools recognizes that a new high school is being planning in western Fairfax that could reduce any future overcrowding at the South Lakes High School. And a new elementary school is being planning in the north Reston Town Center area. Number two, the planning principles. The Isaac Newton Square project supports the planning principles, as written in the recent Comprehensive — the recent Comprehensive Plan. It will be a green community by preserving the large willow oak trees and adding several creative features to address stormwater management. It connects to the Reston trail system. It provides housing for all, including affordable housing with the reduced income tiers that we have been using in Reston. It respects the environment and it involves extensive community engagement, as demonstrated by the recommended approval by the Reston Planning and Zoning Committee of a vote 12-1. Finally, the placemaking, often missed in these deliberations. This project attempts to create a place within Reston oriented to health and fitness for all ages and incomes. The pathway, under the willow oak trees, will provide a walking and running circuit and the One Life Fitness can remain to support to this community oriented to health and fitness. Most importantly, the Isaac Newton Square project will provide additional open space for Reston and western Fairfax County. I hope it's used even more than it's presently used by cyclist, but also others, the walkers of all ages. The large active open space and support facilities were provided area for a variety of community activities including active recreation, such as soccer, football, lacrosse and a lot of

5


other. And other community events — movie night, picnics, a variety of uses there. This area is

part of the large linear park that expands the access, increases visibility, and creates a number of

activity spaces along the W&OD Trail, as envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan and supported

by the Planning Commission —just last week's and at least four other projects. So, I am ready to

move on this, I'm not quite sure what to do about the stormwater management. Do we have some

suggestions or what we would do with that language?

William Mayland, Zoning Administration Division, Department of Planning and Development:

Commissioner, the — Proffer 70 already anticipates that with each final development plan

stormwater management is something the applicant has to demonstrate. So you will have an

opportunity with each of the final development plans come forward to look at how they are doing

stormwater management for each of those phases.

Commissioner Carter: That was my first thought on this — that we do have a chance at the

development plan.

Mr. Mayland: Correct.

Commissioner Carter: By the way, I like this process where we have the zoning case first, we

bring up issues, the detail comes at a later time on the development plans. I like that on these

larger projects like this one. So maybe we can move forward on this. I would like to add the one

change to one of the proffers about the best technology at the time for the field, if we could find

that appropriate spot for that? Can you suggest something Andrew?

Andrew Painter, Applicant's Agent, Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, P.C.: Yeah, Commissioner

Carter we can — we can do that. I have to refer — I think it's Proffer 35, if I'm not mistaken, but

we can take a look at that and add that. I mean, we had talked with Fairfax County Park

Authority staff about that type of language, as well. But where it stands right now at least we are

adhering to FCPA standards which — which may change at the time of FDP by the time, you

know, that the field is actually designed.

Andrea Dorlester, Planning and Development, Fairfax County Park Authority: Right, correct. So

we have — we had a field recently open to the public in Tysons, Quantum Field, which had a —

some proffer language like this that said that at the time of construction of the field they would

use the materials that were the standard — the County standard at the time and that, you know, it

could be updated based on new information.

Commissioner Carter: Could we read something off that would make this — and that language is

fine, I'm just trying to tie it down, that's all.

Chairman Murphy: Mr. Ulfelder?

Commissioner Ulfelder: Yeah, I mean, I think we are looking at — on page 34 of the proffers,

Number 37, B-iii, Design. The final — field portions will contain synthetic all-weather turf,

netting, and fencing, etc. and other design consistent with FCPA specifications. The final design

will be determined in coordination with FCPA — and I think you maybe insert something there

6


that said best, you know, what — what would be the appropriate language. What did we use in Tysons? What was the language? Best — best...

Ms. Dorlester: I believe it was the standards in place at the time of construction.

Commissioner Strandlie: Can we go back and check on that?

Mr. Mayland: I mean — I guess — I think it kind of says it already.

Commissioner Strandlie: I think it was more forward thinking.

Mr. Mayland: It says FCPA specifications, so what those specifications are at the time is what they are going to design to.

Commissioner Ulfelder: Right.

Mr. Mayland: I think we've already said it in the proffers and the applicant has already said it in the proffers.

Commissioner Ulfelder: It will meet all applicable CPA standards for comparable FCPA facilities, but that's for the field and the warm-up field.

Commissioner Carter: I think we should insert what was the best technology at the time in there.

Commissioner Ulfelder: Well, I think that is confusing.

Commissioner Sargeant: Mr. Chairman, isn't it...

Chairman Murphy: Mr. Sargeant, yeah.

Commissioner Sargeant: There is — there is a prescribed authority here that somewhere makes this determination.

Commissioner Carter: Yes, that's Parks.

Commissioner Sargeant: If it's Parks, let us have some deference to their role in this process.

Ms. Dorlester: Sure, and actually the crumb rubber issue is not the purview of the Fairfax County Park Authority. The Director of the Department of Health, Doctor Gloria, is really the one who will decide whether we need to change to a different material. So we will take our guidance from the Department of Health. And if we are directed by the Fairfax County Department of Health, the Health Department to use a different material then we will incorporate that into our standards and the Park Authority standards will be updated and that's what we would expect to be followed.

Commissioner Sargeant: And this would be — this would be — so there is a protocol and process here that starts with review of the health concerns through the Department of Health as relayed to

7


the Fairfax County Park Authority and their decision-making authority in this matter, is that

correct?

Ms. Dorlester: That sounds about right.

Chairman Murphy: Ms. Strandlie?

Commissioner Strandlie: What if we take out the language that specifies synthetic and in iii

under Design said, the final design and composition of the onsite athletic field and warmup field

will be determined in coordination with FCPA at best practices at the time of installation?

Ms. Dorlester: It's my opinion that we're removing the words — removing the term synthetic turf

would be a significant change that would reduce the playing capacity and the credit — the amount

of usage of the field that would then put the applicant out of compliance with the amount of

athletic field need they would have to meet.

Commissioner Carter: It looks like this isn't a — almost isn't a — applicant proffer, this is a Fairfax

County promise rather than an applicant proffer, so I'm going to try to go forward and see where

we get.

Chairman Murphy: Ms. Hurley — or we could defer decision until tomorrow night and work it

out overnight.

Commissioner Carter: We could do that.

Chairman Murphy: And that might be the simple way to do it before we carry this into the week.

Ms. Hurley?

Commissioner Hurley: Again, the concern — I agree with our representative from Parks that

synthetic turf is generally approved of. I think what Commissioner Strandlie is objecting to is

crumb rubber synthetic turf and as Commissioner Carter said there are other forms of synthetic

turf so, you know, could be coco leaves or whatever you say.

Commissioner Carter: Fiber.

Commissioner Hurley: Fiber, okay — whatever it is — but I think it's not the synthetic turf, if I'm

understanding correctly that Ms. Strandlie is objecting to, so it can be synthetic which satisfies

Parks so that it can be used more and used in the rain and all that sort of thing and you get a lot

more use of them. So I think if we leave the word synthetic turf, that satisfies all needs we just

have to — whatever the synthetic is exact composition is what can be changed as time goes on.

Does that meet everybody's wishes?

Commissioner Carter: So maybe we could — I suggest we work a little bit more on this so here is

my motion, motion to defer. I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSON DEFER THE

DECSION ONLY FOR RZ 2018-HM-020, TO A DATE CERTAIN OF SEPTEMBER 19TH,

TOMORROW, WITH THE RECORD TO REMAIN OPEN FOR WRITTEN COMMENTS.

8


Commissioner Tanner: Second.

Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Tanner. Is there a discussion of the motion? All those in favor of the motion to defer the decision only on RZ 2018-HM-020, to a date certain of

September 19th with the record remaining open for comments, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


The motion carried by a vote of 11-0. Commissioner Hart recused himself from the public

hearing.


//

SEA 2010-LE-025 - COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION —

Appl. under Sects. 4-804, 7-607, 9-505, 9-533 and 9-622 of the

Zoning Ordinance to amend SE 2010-LE-025 previously approved

for retail sales establishment large to permit a service station in a

Highway Corridor Overlay District and provisions for

modifications/waivers/increases and uses in a Commercial

Revitalization District and associated modifications to site design

and development conditions. Located at 7940 Richmond Hwy.,

Alexandria, 22306 on approx. 11.17 ac. of land zoned C-8, HC and

CRD. Lee District. Tax Map 101-2 ((6)) A. (LEE DISTRICT)

(PUBLIC HEARING)

David S. Houston, Applicant's Agent, Bean, Kinney & Korman, P.C., reaffirmed the affidavit dated August 28, 2019.

Commissioner Hart disclosed that his law firm, Hart and Horan, P.C., has two cases where there were attorneys in Mr. Houston's firm representing adverse parties. He noted that matter and those parties were unrelated to the subject applications and there was no business or financial

relationship; therefore, it would not affect his ability to participate in this case.

William Mayland, Zoning Evaluation Division, Department of Planning and Development,

presented the staff report, a copy of which is in the date file. He noted that staff recommended approval of application SEA 2010-LE-025.

Mr. Houston gave a presentation on the subject application.

There was a discussion between Mr. Houston; John Paul Andrews, Costco Wholesale

Corporation; and multiple Commissioners on the following issues:

9

SEA 2010-LE-025 - COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION September 18, 2019

• A summary of the design for the underground gas tanks and the leak detection system,

and an overview of the gas station attendants training;

• The traffic control procedures utilized by the tire center for exiting vehicles;

• The proposed buffering for the adjacent neighborhood that would address screening,

lighting, and noise;

• The noise study currently being conducted and the applicant's proposed method for

mitigating a noise issue determination by building an 8-foot masonry wall;

• The impact of the application on the ingress and egress points to Richmond Highway and

the proposed improvements to those areas;

• The signage for the site;

• The traffic flow for the gas station area;

• The height of the gas station canopy and its ability to accommodate large commercial

vehicles;

• Alternate locations on the property to place the gas pumps to lessen the impact to the

adjacent neighborhood;

• The installation of the 8-foot masonry wall for additional buffering for the adjacent

community;

• The addition of a conduit or infrastructure for electric vehicle charging stations in the

parking lot; and

• The method used to separate petroleum product from water.


Chairman Murphy called for speakers from the audience, but received no response.

There was a final discussion between Mr. Houston and Commissioner Migliaccio on the

following issues:

• The applicant's willingness to provide a masonry wall for additional buffer between the

gas pumps and the adjacent community; and

• The applicant's willingness to provide a conduit for electric vehicle charging.

The discussion resulted in the applicant's agreement to provide the conduit for electric vehicle

charging.

There were no further comments or questions from the Commission and staff had no closing

remarks; therefore, Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing and recognized Commissioner

Migliaccio for action on this case.


Commissioner Migliaccio: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize if I'm a little tired this

evening, I am coming back from a trip and I have a cold I'm just fighting. What we have tonight

is a application for a Costco gas station on Richmond Highway. It is — it has received the

approval — the recommendation of our Planning staff, it has gone through the Lee District Land

Use Committee and received a 16-0-1 recommendation of approval. All neighbors were invited

10


to communicate with the Land Use Committee, come to the Land Use Committee, were part of the conversation that their concerns were taken into account. This site, as Mr. Houston mentioned earlier, was built and approved in 2011. Before that, it was a blighted drive-in movie theater for a number of years. So, it was an improvement from what we had in this commercial and revitalization district. This applicant has agreed to and will work on getting the proper development condition in there for the conduit for the EV charging station, one or two. But this applicant has agreed to dedicate the right-of-way for the necessary Richmond Highway improvements and provide money for the sidewalk and off-road bike lanes to be built, has a net decrease in pervious area. As I mentioned before, it allows what was previously a blighted a theater to continue as a low performing store, economically we don't need to look at that, but we want to make certain that this does not become blighted in the future and become shut down. It provides amenity for Costco members only. The gas station is only for Costco members. People are not going to drive by because there is no signage on Richmond Highway that tells them the price of gas — of a gallon of gas, to come in. As I mentioned before, the Lee District Land Use Committee on November — or September 9' voted 16-0-1. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I do have a few motions to make this evening and I also would like Mr. Houston to agree on the record that the development conditions dated September 30th, 2019 (sic), that you read and agree to those with the addition of the electrical vehicle charging station.

David Houston, Applicant's Agent, Blank Rome, LLP: Yes, we would.

Commissioner Migliaccio: Thank you. Mr. Chairman I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL OF SEA 2010-LE-025, SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS DATED SEPTEMBER 18TH, 2019 (sic).

Commissioner Hart: Seconded by Mr. Hart.

Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Is there a discussion of the motion? All those in favor of the motion to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that is approve SEA 2010-LE-025, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Murphy: Opposed? Hold on.

William Mayland, Planning and Zoning Evaluation, Department of Planning and Development: Just for verification, it's September 3rd condition.

Commissioner Migliaccio: I'm sorry, SEPTEMBER 3RD WITH THE MODIFICATION FOR THIS EVENING.

Mr. Mayland: Okay, thank you.

Chairman Murphy: All right, the motion carries. Ms. Cortina abstains.

Commissioner Carter: I voted no.

11


Chairman Murphy: And Mr. Carter votes no.

Commissioner Migliaccio: I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND

TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL OF THE FOUR WAIVERS AND

MODIFICATIONS, AS FOUND IN THE STAFF REPORT.

Commissioner Hart: Second.

Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Discussion of that motion? All those in favor of the

motion, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Murphy: Opposed? Motion carries. Ms. Cortina abstains. Okay, that's the only

abstention.

Commissioner Migliaccio: And finally, Mr. Chairman, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING

COMMISSION CONCUR WITH STAFF AND RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF

SUPERVISORS THE APPROVAL OF A PARKING REDUCTION AMENDMENT REQUEST

#25259-PKS-001-1, PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 26 OF SECTION 11-102, OF ARTICLE

11 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE BASED ON THE UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF

THE PROPOSED USE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF

DATED JUNE 26, 2019, IN APPENDIX 12 OF THE STAFF REPORT.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Is there a discussion of the motion? All those in favor

of that motion, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Murphy: Opposed? Motion carries. Ms. Cortina abstains.

The first motion carried by a vote of 10-1-1. Commissioner Carter voted in opposition.

Commissioner Cortina abstained from the vote.

The second and third motions carried by a vote of 11-0-1. Commissioner Cortina abstained from

the vote.


II

SE 2019-SU-002 - FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY —

Appl. under Sect. 5-504 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit office

and maintenance facilities incidental to water purification facilities.

12

SE 2019-SU-002/2232-Y18-35 — FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER September 18, 2019 AUTHORITY

Located at 14925 Willard Rd., Chantilly, 22151 on approx. 10.79 ac. of land zoned 1-5, AN, and WS. Tax Map 33-4 ((1)) 15B. (Concurrent with 2232-Y18-35). (SULLY DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

2232-Y18-35 - FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY — Appl. under Sect(s). 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2232 of the Code of Virginia to permit a distribution and vehicle maintenance facility. Located at 14925 Willard Rd., Chantilly, 22151 on approx. 10.79 ac. of land zoned I-5, AN and WS. Tax Map 33-4 ((1)) 15B. (Concurrent with SE 2019-SU-002). (SULLY DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

John McGranahan, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Applicant's Agent, reaffirmed the affidavit dated September 6, 2019.

There were no disclosures by Commission members.

Commissioner Tanner asked that Chairman Murphy ascertain whether there were any speakers for this application. There being none, he asked that presentations by staff and the applicant be waived and the public hearing closed. No objections were expressed; therefore, Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing and recognized Commissioner Tanner for action on these cases.


Commissioner Tanner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, tonight we have a special exception in concurrent with a 2232 for Fairfax County Water Authority. This is to permit local office space and maintenance facility for a heavy public utility facility. I agree with staff's determination that the maintenance facility proposed satisfies the criteria for location, character and extent, as specified. And therefore, its substantially in accord with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I will go ahead and move on this tonight. I request the applicant state on the record their acceptance of the development conditions dated September 4th, 2019.

John McGranahan, Applicant's Agent, Hunton Andrews Kurth, LLP: Yes, again, John McGranahan for the applicant and we agree with the development conditions.

Commissioner Tanner: Thank you. Mr. Chairman I have four motions tonight. First, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THAT THE MAINTENANCE FACILITY PROPOSED UNDER 2232-Y18-35 SATIFIES THE CRITERIA OF LOCATION, CHARACTER, AND EXTENT, AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION 15.2-2232 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED, AND THEREFORE, IS SUBSTANTIALLY IN ACCORD WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.


13

SE 2019-SU-002/2232-Y18-35 — FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER September 18, 2019

AUTHORITY

Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Is there a discussion of that motion? All those in favor

of the motion to approve 2232-Y18-35, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


Commissioner Tanner: Second, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVE SE 2019-SU-002,

SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS DATED SEPTEMBER 4TH, 2019.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Discussion? All those in favor of the motion to

recommend to the Board of Supervisors that it approve SE 2019-SU-002, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


Commissioner Tanner: Third, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVE A MODIFICATION OF

PARAGRAPH 3 OF SECTION 13-305 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE

TRANSITIONAL SCREENING YARD REQUIREMENTS TO USE EXISTING

VEGETATION AND THE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL ALONG THE WESTERN

PROPERTY LINE, AS DEPICTED IN THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION PLAT.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Discussion? All those in favor of that motion, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


Commissioner Tanner: And finally, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION

RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVE A MODIFICATION OF

PARAGRAPH 3B OF SECTION 13-203 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THE

PERIPHERAL PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING ALONG THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY

BOUNDARY IN FAVOR OF SHRUBS DEPICTED IN SPECIAL EXCEPTION PLAT.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Discussion? All those in favor of that motion, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

14

SE 2019-SU-002/2232-Y18-35 — FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER September 18, 2019 AUTHORITY




//

SE 2018-PR-023 - FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY — Appl. under Sects. 3-104, 5-504, 9-201 and 9-609 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit a heavy public utility office and maintenance facilities in the 1-5 zoned district and parking in a residential zoned district. Located at 8505 Lee Hwy., Fairfax, 22031 on approx. 4.27 ac. of land zoned R-1, 1-5, CRA and HC. Tax Map 49-3 ((1)) 50A. (Concurrent with 2232-P18-26). (PROVIDENCE DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

2232-P18-26 - FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY — Appl. under Sect(s). 15.2-2204 and 15.2-2232 of the Code of Virginia to permit Central Distribution System Maintenance Facility. Located at 8505 Lee Hwy., Fairfax, 22031 on approx. 4.27 ac. of land zoned R-1, 1-5, CRA and HC. Tax Map 49-3 ((1)) 50A. (Concurrent with SE 2018-PR-023). (PROVIDENCE DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

John McGranahan, Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP, Applicant's Agent, reaffirmed the affidavit dated September 6, 2019.


Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner asked that Chairman Murphy ascertain whether there were any speakers for this application. There being none, he asked that presentations by staff and the applicant be waived and the public hearing closed. No objections were expressed; therefore, Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing and recognized Commissioner Tanner for action on these cases.


Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, with this application, the Fairfax County Water Authority seeks a special exception to permit local office space in a new western distribution system maintenance facility, which is considered a heavy public utility use. The applicant also seeks concurrent approval of a 2232 Public Facility Review, which requires the Planning Commission to determine whether the location, character, and extent of this proposed maintenance facility is substantially in accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The facility was reviewed by staff against the Public Facilities section of the Comprehensive Plan - Policy

15

SE 2018-PR-023/2232-P18-26 - FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER September 18, 2019

AUTHORITY

Plan and finds that the proposed development is in harmony with the Plan's guidance regarding

location, character, and extent of public facilities and satisfies the public facility requirements of

Virginia Code Section 15.2-2232, as amended. Mr. Chairman, staff also recommends approval of

SE 2018-PR-023, subject to the proposed development conditions dated September 16t1 , 2019.

And finally, Mr. Chairman, it is notable that the Commission received letters from the Fairfax

County Public Schools, an adjacent property user, and the Greater Merrifield Business

Association, who support these applications. Since I concur with staff's analysis and

recommendations and believe the proposed location for this critical public facility needs to be

central to the County, I will move for approval of these two concurrent applications. And with

that, Mr. Chairman, I request that the applicants confirm for the record their agreement to the

proposed development conditions dated September 16th, 2019.


John McGranahan, Applicant's Agent, Hunton Andrews Kurth, LLP: Yes.

Chairman Murphy: We are rolling because there's no athletic turf and there is no gas here, so we

are really rolling now.

Mr. McGranahan: The applicant agrees with the development conditions.

Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: I'm usually the one.

Chairman Murphy: You still have an opportunity.

Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: As previously noted, I concur with staff's conclusion that the

maintenance facility proposed under 2232-P18-26 satisfies the codes of— satisfies the criteria of

the location, character, and extent, as specified in Virginia Code, as amended. Therefore, Mr.

Chairman, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION FIND THE SUBJECT

APPLICATION, 2232-P18-26, SUBSTANTIALLY IN ACCORD WITH THE PROVISIONS OF

THE ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Is there a discussion of the motion? All those in favor

of the motion to approve 2232-P18-26, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Murphy: Opposed? Motion carries. Mr. Niedzielski-Eichner.

Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I MOVE THAT THE

PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

APPROVAL OF SE 2018-PR-023, SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS

DATED SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2019.

16

SE 2018-PR-023/2232-P18-26 - FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER September 18, 2019 AUTHORITY


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Discussion? All those in favor of the motion to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that it approve SE 2018-PR-023, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Mr. Chairman, finally, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL OF THE MODIFICATIONS AND WAIVERS LISTED IN THE HANDOUT DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 2019, THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU TODAY AND WHICH SHALL BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD OF THIS CASE.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Hart. Discussion of that motion? All those in favor, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.




//

PCA-C-597-05 - PS BUSINESS PARKS, L.P. — Appl. to amend

the proffers for RZ C-597 previously approved for a hotel to

permit an athletic field and associated modifications to proffers

and site design with an overall Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.72.

Located on the S. side of Boone Blvd. approx. 500 ft. W. of its

intersection with Gallows Rd. on approx. 2.50 ac. of land zoned C-

3, SC and HC. Comp. Plan Rec: Residential Mixed Use. Tax Map

39-1 ((6)) 69A (pt.). (Concurrent with SEA 2007-PR-014).

(PROVIDENCE DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

SEA 2007-PR-014 - PS BUSINESS PARKS, L.P. — Appl. under

Sects. 4-304, 9-014, 9-607 and 9-624 of the Zoning Ordinance to

amend SE 2007-PR-014 previously approved for a hotel to permit

a quasi-public athletic field in C-3 District and associated

modifications to site design and development conditions. Located

at 8229 Boone Blvd., Tysons, 22182 on approx. 4.95 ac. of land

zoned C-3, SC and HC. Tax Map 39-1 ((6)) 69A. (Concurrent with

17

PCA-C-597-05/SEA 2007-PR-014 - PS BUSINESS PARKS, L.P. September 18, 2019

AUTHORITY

PCA-C-597-05). (PROVIDENCE DISTRICT) (PUBLIC

HEARING)

Elizabeth Baker, Applicant's Agent, Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, P.C., reaffirmed the

affidavit dated September 5, 2019.

Commissioner Hart disclosed that his law firm, Hart and Horan, P.C., has two cases where there

were attorneys in Ms. Baker's firm representing adverse parties. He noted that matter and those

parties were unrelated to the subject applications and there was no business or financial

relationship; therefore, it would not affect his ability to participate in this case.

Katelyn Antonucci, Zoning Evaluation Division, Department of Planning and Development,

presented the staff report, a copy of which is in the date file. She noted that staff recommended

approval of applications PCA-C-597-05 and SEA 2007-PR-014.

Ms. Baker gave a presentation on the subject applications.

There was a discussion between Ms. Baker; Andrea Dorlester, Fairfax County Park Authority;

and multiple Commissioners on the following issues:

• The athletic field dimensions;

• The usage of the athletic field by youth and adults;

• The ability to incorporate permanent restroom facilities near the athletic field; and

• The proposed language in Proffer 3A, Synthetic Turf

The discussion resulted in a change to Proffer 3A, Synthetic Turf, to include additional language

that stipulated approval by the Fairfax County Park Authority.

Chairman Murphy called for speakers from the audience, but received no response.

There were no further comments or questions from the Commission; therefore, Chairman

Murphy closed the public hearing and recognized Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner for action

on these cases.


Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With this application, PS

Business Parks seeks concurrent approval of a proffered condition amendment and special

exception amendment to allow a publicly accessible athletic field use on this particular property.

The applicant proposes to replace the approved but never built hotel use with a use-size — youth-

sized, under 13 athletic field and associated surface parking. The athletic field is intended to

fulfill the proffer committed to by The Mile, a 38.8-acre rezoning application, major in scope,

approved by the Board of Supervisors just this past July 16th. In order to satisfy the athletic field

expectations, the Mile proffered to construct a new synthetic turf athletic field, which is to be

constructed on this subject property. Though the PS Business Parks will retain ownership of the

18

PCA-C-597-05/SEA 2007-PR-014 - PS BUSINESS PARKS, L.P. September 18, 2019 AUTHORITY

athletic field, the Fairfax County Park Authority will operate and program the field's use. In addition to staff's recommendation for approval, the McLean Citizens Association has reviewed this application and also recommends approval. Finally, Mr. Chairman, this new synthetic turf

field will be a welcome addition to the Park Authority's inventory of playing fields in Tysons and I therefore will be moving to approve these applications. This is a good news story. Before putting forth the motion on this application, I want to ask the Park Authority representative about the — we've already — we've already done this, talked about the port-a-potties. So with that, Mr.

Chairman, I request the applicants confirm for the record their agreement to the proposed

development conditions dated September 5, 2019, as amended with the agreement — agreed port-

a-potty — or synthetic field language be there.

Elizabeth Baker, Applicant's Agent, Walsh, Colucci, Lubeley & Walsh, P.C.: The synthetic

language is actually going in proffers, as opposed to the development conditions. But on behalf

of the applicant, we do accept the development conditions.

Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Okay, very good. So, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING

COMMISSION RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVE PCA-C-597-05, CONSISTENT WITH PROFFERS DATED AUGUST 6, 2019, AND AS AMENDED WITH THE LANGUAGE AGREED TO THIS EVENING.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Tanner. Is there a discussion of the motion? All those in

favor of the motion to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that it approve PCA-C-597-05,

say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.

Chairman Murphy: Opposed? Motion carries. Mr. Niedzielski-Eichner.

Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I FURTHER MOVE THAT THE

PLANNING COMMISSON RECOMMEND THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

APPROVE SEA 2007-PR-014, SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS DATED SEPTEMBER 5th, 2019.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Tanner. Is there a discussion of that motion? All those in

favor of the motion to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that it approve SEA 2007-PR-014,

say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


19

PCA-C-597-05/SEA 2007-PR-014 - PS BUSINESS PARKS, L.P. September 18, 2019

AUTHORITY

Commissioner Niedzielski-Eichner: Finally, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSON

RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVAL OF THE

MODIFICATIONS AND WAIVERS LISTED IN THE HANDOUT DATED SEPTEMBER

18TH, 2019, THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU TODAY AND WHICH SHALL BE PART OF

THE RECORD OF THIS CASE.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded by Mr. Tanner. Is there a discussion of that motion? All those in

favor, say aye.

Commissioners: Aye.




//

The Commission went into recess at 9:40 p.m. and reconvened in the Board Auditorium at 10:03

p.m.

//

SE 2018-BR-028 - CLASSIC COTTAGES, LLC — Appl. under

Sects. 9-610 and 9-615 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit a cluster

residential development and a waiver of minimum district size.

Located at 4037, 4107 and 4111 Maple Ave., Fairfax, 22032 on

approx. 8.08 ac. of land zoned R-1. Tax Map 58-3 ((6)) 37,38 and

38A. (BRADDOCK DISTRICT) (PUBLIC HEARING)

Scott Adams, Applicant's Agent, McGuireWoods, LLP, reaffirmed the affidavit dated August 13,

2019.


Emma Estes, Zoning Evaluation Division (ZED), Department of Planning and Development

(DPD), presented the staff report, a copy of which is in the date file. She noted that staff

recommended approval of application SE 2018-BR-028.

Mr. Adams gave a presentation on the subject application and addressed staff's concerns by

agreeing to a green building commitment, which included a third-party certification for the

proposed homes and a revision of the Lot 4 dwelling setback from 20 feet to 25 feet.

20

SE 2018-BR-028 - CLASSIC COTTAGES, LLC September 18, 2019

There was a discussion between Mr. Adams; Avinash Sareen, Engineer, TNT Environmental,

Inc.; Ms. Estes; William O'Donnell, ZED, DPD; and multiple Commissioners on the following

issues:

• The third-party green building certification for the proposed homes;

• The difference between the proposed application and a by-right development;

• The sidewalk connection to Maple Avenue;

• The applicant's outreach efforts to the community and the changes proposed in response

to the adjacent community's concerns;

• Development Condition 5, which pertained to notification to future home purchasers of

maintenance responsibility for common open space areas, individual BMP facilities, and

detailed instructions;

• The applicant's stormwater plan proposal for this application and its compliance with the

Department of Environmental Quality and the Core of Engineers requirements;

• The applicant's stormwater proposal for Lot 5, which involved placement of a pipe to

circumvent the residential lot and out fill at or near the existing grade to not adversely

affect the receiving channel and to keep the existing flow in that channel;

• The status of the off-site easement; and

• Development Condition 3, which was revised to change the Lot 4 dwelling setback from

20 feet to 25 feet.


Chairman Murphy called the first listed speaker and recited the rules of testimony.

Mathew McDonald, 4029 Maple Avenue, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject application because of increased traffic, the impact to the environment and wildlife habitat

caused by the removal of the pond, and concern over the amount of stormwater runoff during

heavy rains if the pond were removed.

Jim McDonald, 4029 Maple Avenue, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject

applications, echoing the previous speakers concerns regarding stormwater runoff and lack of

water retention without the pond.

Scott Brody, 4131 Lenox Drive, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition citing the delayed

notification to the community, a lack of community input at the land use committee meetings, and the close proximity of Lot 4 dwelling to his property line.

Stephen Koplan, 4133 Lenox Drive, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject

applications because the tree protection plan did not take into consideration the roots of existing

trees on adjacent properties and echoed the previous speaker's concerns about the delayed

community outreach efforts and the close proximity of Lot 4 to the property line. She

recommended that Lot 4 be eliminated. (A copy of Mr. Koplan's statement is in the date file.)

Cheryl Pergolizzi, 9809 John Robert Way, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject applications because of the negative impact on area wildlife caused by the removal of the pond.

21


There was a discussion between Ms. Estes and multiple Commissioners over the following

issues:

• The Park Authority's review of the subject application, which did not identify any historic

resources on this site;

• The location of the pond was partially in the Resource Protection Area (RPA), which was

not included in the RPA due to it being man-made and not part of the perennial stream

path;

• Staff's determination that the pond did not meet the County requirements for stormwater

management;

• The impact to neighboring trees as a result of this development; and

• The steps required by the applicant during site plan review that would provide

information on the off-site trees to determine the location of their root system and the

additional tree preservation measures to minimize the impact on those systems.

Brian Amato, 4135 Lenox Drive, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject application

on the following issues:

• The lots 4 and 5 dwelling setbacks in comparison to the other lots;

• The construction of lots 4 and 5 would have a detrimental impact to the value of the land

on lots 21 through 25;

• The Urban Forest Management Division consultation did not include community input;

and

• The need for further evaluation of alternative approaches to include areas of the RPA.

Mr. Amato, Ms. Estes, and multiple Commissioners discussed the factors involved in

determining a field delineated RPA and the applicant's options if staff determined that the entire

channel was a perennial stream. (A copy of Mr. Amato's statement is in the date file.)

Katie Cook, 4129 Lenox Drive, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject application,

echoing previous speakers' concerns over the negative impact to established trees on neighboring

properties, the amount of non-permeable surface that could result in a large amount of water

runoff, and the benefits of six lots versus the proposed seven lots. (A copy of Ms. Cook's

statement is in the date file.)

Kelly Price, 4127 Lenox Drive, Fairfax, Virginia, spoke in opposition to the subject application,

echoing the previous speakers' request for six new lots versus seven. Ms. Price suggested that lot

4 and its pipe stem be eliminated, which would allow the shape of lots 3 and 5 to be modified so

that the cul-de-sac did not bend to the south and permitted the relocation of the dwelling on lot 5

further away from the properties on Lenox Drive.

Ms. Price; Ms. Estes; and multiple Commissioners discussed how the cul-de-sac could be

straightened, the dimensions of lots 4 and 5, and the placement of the stormwater detention

system next to lot 5.

22


There being no more speakers, Chairman Murphy called for a rebuttal statement from Mr.

Adams, who responded to testimony from the speakers as follows:

• The determination of the size and location of the RPA delineation;

• The method involved in determining the layout of the proposed lots;

• Additional provisions in the development conditions that pertained to tree saving along

the frontage of the proposed lots and the applicant's requirements to minimize impacts to

off-site trees;

• The applicant's agreement to move the lot 4 dwelling setback to 25 feet, which met the

required setback for the R-1 District;

• The man-made pond was not designed to provide a stormwater management function and

impeded the flow of water going into the stream;

• The portion of the man-made pond located in the RPA would be subject to the County,

the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers processes prior to removal;

• The applicant's proposal that diverted 16 percent of the water from the County easement

along Mr. McDonald's property to the proposed stormwater system and included

treatment of water for quality, as well as a controlled release from the stormwater facility;

and

• The applicant would continue to meet with the neighbors to discuss their concerns and

address when possible.

There was a final discussion between Mr. Adams and multiple Commissioners on the following

issues:

• The benefits of providing additional dwelling setback for lots 4 and 5 and suggested ways

to achieve it; and

• The development condition that included consultation and mitigation with the Fairfax

County Urban Forest Management to minimize any impact to neighbors' trees that could

be affected by grading.

The discussion resulted in no changes to the application.

There were no further comments or questions from the Commission and staff had no closing

remarks; therefore, Chairman Murphy closed the public hearing and recognized Commissioner Hurley for action on this case.


//

Commissioner Hurley: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that this special exception with seven

houses and development conditions would result in a better overall development than by-right development without the conditions — without any of these extra things that the applicant is

proposing. And they do make the minimum setbacks so — you know, there's no reason that we

can oppose it legally, if you will. But, having said that, as Ms. Cortina just said — Commissioner

23


Cortina just said — a few fairly small adjustments could improve this, as several of commissions

have — Commissioners have suggested a little bit more adjustment. Either a counterclockwise

rotation of the house on Lot 5, maybe moving up the house on Lot 4. Or, as Commissioner

Niedzielski-Eichner, mentioned maybe moving that detention facility a little bit further north or

making it — or resizing it, reshaping or something, that could move it further out of the way that —

anyway, I think if you get together with your computer or your Lego blocks or something

tomorrow, I think you could make this a little bit better that we'd all feel more comfortable with.

And so what I propose — I don't think it will take that much as Commissioner — several

Commissioners said just minor changes. So, with that said, I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING

COMMISSION DEFER THE DECISION ONLY FOR SE 2018-BR-028, TO A DATE

CERTAIN OF 19 SEPTEMBER 2019.


Chairman Murphy: Seconded — are you sure you want to do this tomorrow night? We just —

Commissioner Hurley: I don't want to defer longer than that.

Chairman Murphy: Okay.

Commissioner Hurley: They do have a Board date and we are trying not to crunch it — it

shouldn't take long.

Chairman Murphy: October 15th is the Board date.

Commissioner Hurley: Right, but —

Chairman Murphy: Okay.

Commissioner Hurley: My supervisor does not like things pushed to just before the Board date.

Chairman Murphy: Okay, all those in favor of the motion to defer decision on SE 2018-BR-028,

to a date certain of September 19th, with the record remaining open for written comment, say

aye.

Commissioners: Aye.


The motion carried by a vote of 11-0. Commissioner Clarke was not present for the vote.


II

24

OW Signat re of Notary

CLOSING September 18, 2019

The meeting was adjourned at 11:58 p.m.

Peter F. Murphy, Chairman

James R. Hart, Vice Chairman

Audio and video recordings of this meeting are available at the Planning Commission Office, 12000 Government Center Parkway, Suite 552, Fairfax, Virginia 22035.

Minutes by: Teresa M. Wang

Approved on: March 4, 2020

Jacob L. L. Caporaletti, Clerk to the Fairfax County Planning Commission

County of Fairfax

Commonwealth of Virginia

The for oing instrument was acknowledged before me this day ofl\AMA\202°, by

Jacob Caoraletti.

Notary registration number: 11\ °t

Commission expiration: -101\AqOof ki\ S )2 02A

25

Li

minutes of fairfax county planning commission … · fairfax county planning commission wednesday,...

Documents